MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966497125 · doi:10.1080/02786826.2019.1652242

Re-aerosolization in liquid-based air samplers induces bias in bacterial diversity

2019· article· en· W2966497125 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanie Lemieux, Marc Veillette, Hamza Mbareche, Caroline Duchaine

Bibliographic record

VenueAerosol Science and Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAerosolizationBioaerosolIndoor bioaerosolEnvironmental scienceBacilliEnvironmental chemistryLimulus amebocyte lysateChemistryBacteriaMicrobiologyChromatographyAerosolFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bioaerosols collected in a liquid-based sampler can be re-aerosolized into the airflow during collection and lost or concentrated in the collection fluid and overestimated during the subsequent analyses. Very little information is available concerning the specific impact on bioaerosol quantification and diversity and wrong evaluation of pathogens or potentially harmful microorganisms concentration could lead to incorrect data interpretation and inaccurate exposure risk assessment. The aim of this two-part study was to better understand how evaporation impacts the results obtained from liquid-based samplers. Bacterial consortium was spiked in the collection vessels of the Coriolisµ® and the BioSampler® and the bacterial concentration was monitored after running the samplers in vitro. Relative ratios of the bacteria were analyzed using qPCR (before/after). A field study in which liquid-based air samplers in a natural environment were compared to filter-based samplers was performed. This allowed for the relative characterization of either concentration or the re-aerosolization between the two samplers using high throughput sequencing methods. Amongst the four strains of bacteria examined in vitro, results suggest differential behavior between concentration or re-aerosolization from the liquid. Re-aerosolization of bacteria is difficult to predict as the cell-surface hydrophobicity, the liquid-based air sampler and its flowrate can influence it. The sequencing results from field samples confirmed the loss of entire genera by re-aerosolization (Brevundimonas, Clostridium, Mycobacterium, and Smithella) out of the BioSampler® while concentration of several other genera were reduced (Bradyrhizobium, Delftia, Propionibacterium, and Sphingomonas). These observations suggest that evaporation in liquid samplers might lead to over- or underestimation of the prevalence of some genera.Copyright © 2019 American Association for Aerosol Research

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerosol Science and TechnologySame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207